jh901 wrote: > I'm not sure what evidence it is which would win your heart and mind. > The strides which have been made in digital over the past few years are > well documented by engineers, pro reviewers, and thousands of informed > audiophiles.
A couple of pointers to peer-reviewed publications where engineers document those strides (based on empirical data) would actually go a long way. > Spend some time with the forum thread and I linked to get an idea of > what's out there these days and how shortcomings have been and continue > to be overcome. I prefer to spend my time reading scientific publications, as well as implementing, measuring and testing my own audio systems. > Wondering, by the way, what the difference for you was many years ago > when Transporter came along? Did you buy one and then discover how > great it was (for the time)? Isn't that more or less what you'd expect > to happen for yourself and others as new media servers, DACs and other > related products are developed and introduced? I never got myself a Transporter, as the tests I did showed that it wasn't in any way a quantum leap compared to other squeezebox products (and the Touch actually proved itself better in many situations). The non-Transporter squeezeboxes were interesting mostly because they were one of the first properly integrated systems, and had a great cost/quality ratio - the Transporter less so. "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=96407 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
